I know this is corny, but it makes me smile! I hope you smile too.
With amazing stealth, Paul and I get within 50 of the landing site.
|
Why, you may ask am I writing about sheep? This is a good question, since I am not a sheep farmer and don't have any real experience with them. My encounters with sheep would be of the Serta variety, though I don't count sheep when I can't sleep. What comes to mind is Ernie driving Bert crazy because he can't sleep and all the cute little sheep flying over their beds, at least that's how I remember it (I was of the 1st Sesame Street generation!). Sheep have always been good characters for children's books, songs and shows - from "Mary had a little lamb", to "Lamb Chop" the famous sock puppet. My favorite would be "Shawn the Sheep". This show is cute and funny for the "littles" and "bigs" of the family. We were able to watch it through Netflix Instant Play in the past and I do recommend it!  "Shawn the Sheep"  Inspiration for writing This was the real reason for writing about sheep. I think they are beautiful, peaceful and I just plain like them. On Sunday, we were out for a country drive and came across green hills covered with sheep. Everytime I see them, it stops me in my tracks and I want to watch them for awhile. It's quiet except for bell sounds in the distance. They munch away on the grass seeming to not have a care in the world. For a few moments time stills...  Sheep also make me think of Shepherds. I usually think of shepherds being of old, but recently we watched a documentary about sheep farmers in Montana. People (shepherds that seemed like cowboys) would take the sheep up into the hills and mountains to graze. They used dogs and horses and basically camped out all Summer with the sheep, protecting and guiding them. Psalm 23, probably the most well known psalm, starts with "The Lord is my Shepherd" and speaks of His care, protection, peace and guidance. Jesus, who calls himself the Good Shepherd, often spoke in parables to get his message across and one of them refers to sheep. My paraphrase: Jesus was sitting around talking to tax collectors and "sinners", and the religious folk were complaining about it - so Jesus told this parable - Suppose one of you has 100 sheep and loses one of them. Does he not leave the 99 and go out and look for the lost sheep until he finds it? And when he finds it he's happy and puts it on his shoulder and carries it home. Then he calls his neighbors and friends together to celebrate that he found his lost sheep. And then Jesus says, " I tell you that in the same way there will be more rejoicing in heaven over one sinner who repents than over 99 righteous persons who do not need to repent". I love this, - regardless of one's perspective/experience, Jesus remains an attractive, compelling figure of history. We might have negative baggage that turns us away from thinking about religion/church/God or we might have extra baggage from too much religion, but Jesus calls to all of us. "I have come that they may have life and life abundantly".  A Thanksgiving hymn of harvest... "You care for the land and water it; you enrich it abundantly. The streams of God are filled with water to provide the people with grain, for so you have ordained it."  "You drench it's furrows and level its ridges; you soften it with showers and bless its crops."  "You crown the year with your bounty, and your carts overflow with abundance."  "The grasslands of the desert overflow; the hills are clothed with gladness."  "The meadows are covered with flocks and the valleys are mantled with grain; they shout for joy and sing."  Psalm 65:9-13
 The whisper in the woods Can you hear the hush Light pouring in Through the trees and brush  I love the stillness all around Only the noise of birds a song Crackling of leaves, chattering of bugs Nature's sweet music is humming long  I hear the whisper Calling to me Blowing in The peace I need  I sense God's Spirit His love abounds A friend forever His melody sounds  A walk in the woods I'd recommend Listen for the whisper Until the end  Walk in faith With eyes that see His delight Is for you and me  A forest stroll Brings Him near Clears the mind And fills with cheer  I love the trees the forest glade the sky, the rocks the light and shade  In the still I hear His call Thank-you Oak And Maple tall  No, it is the majestic hummingbird moth, a White-lined Sphinx Hummingbird Moth to be exact. I love these insects, they flitter around from flower to flower getting nectar. They are so fun to watch and you are able to get much closer than a hummingbird, as long as you sit still. They don't seem to mind and you can observe one for quite awhile. We don't see them often, probably 1-2 times a year usually in late Summer/Early Fall, so each time I do, it is special and I just want to grab the camera and relish the moment.     There are several different hummingbird moths that can be found in our area. This is a picture of a Pandora Sphnix Moth Caterpillar that my middle son found several years back. It is eating from what I believe is called Virginia Creeper which is related to Wild Grape. Sphinx Hummingbird Caterpillars eat a wide range of plants and particularly like Wild Grape and Apple trees which we both have at our place. After eating their fill of leaves in the Fall, they crawl to the ground and dig themselves several inches down and spend the Winter cozy beneath the snow and dirt. The pupa is large, tapered at the ends and look as if it is varnished. Then, adult Sphinx Hummingbird moths will emerge next Spring, crawl to the surface and fly off into their new world.  A beautiful creature with such intricate design, I always thought brown and pink went well together!
 Growing up I learned about evolution in school science classes (like everyone else) and I also knew Genesis 1:1 "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth". I really did not think about either view that much and did not know much more than the very basics of either evolution or creation science/intelligent design. My first encounter with creation science was towards the end of college when a friend gave me a book about a creation science theory that explained various geological features. I thought it was interesting and thought provoking, but with a wedding, new marriage, new job and a baby 2 and a half years later, it was definately put on the back shelf! Then, about 6-7 years ago, I somehow ended up in possession of a creation science book that grabbed me from the start. It was well written, had a nice tone, was understandable - yet made me really think and focus, and was written by a Phd Scientist who had previously believed and taught evolution at the college level. - As a challenge to myself I thought that it would be a good brain exercise for me to try to compile my knowledge and thoughts on creation science in a semi-concise way without going back to books and other sources for information. But, before I do that I want to mention some pet peeves of mine concerning the evolution/creation debate. Pet Peeve #1: The terms evolution and natural selection are thrown around without being defined. There is a big difference between micro-evolution and macro-evolution. Micro-evolution is the change that can and does occur within a species, such as variations in features, colors, adaptations to environment. Examples would be the famous peppered moth study, Darwin's finches (beak adaptations) wolves/dogs, bacteria, ect. There are definite observed changes, but a finch is still a finch and moth is still a type of moth. We are not talking about one species gradually changing into another. The means for these changes is natural selection through mutations. Natural Selection within species is not in dispute by scientists and people that have either the view of Creation or Evolution. In fact, I remember reading that it was not Charles Darwin who first wrote about Natural Selection, but an earlier scientist who held a belief that God created the world. Macro-evolution is the theory of life evolving from the simplest life forms into progressing species to all the plants and animals and humans we see today. But, when you hear the term evolution it usually infers micro and macro evolution with no distinction. Pet Peeve #2: I think it is unfair and not true that someone who does not believe in (macro)evolution is slapped with the label - "Anti-Science". Science is huge - there is applied science and technology, vast amounts of scientific knowledge that has been observed and tested and researched and numerous disciplines: biology, chemistry, physics, astronomy, geology, ect. Someone who holds to a creationist view is still able to excel and succeed in a science field and many do (some quietly and privately). One's belief in evolution or creation may cause some assumptions that could be wrong or right, but science is about discovering how things work, testing hypothesis, research, development of new products, the abilty to question and find real answers to improve life. I think Origin Science (Questions and Theories about how the universe and life came to be) is really in a category by itself and so to label someone "Anti-Science" because they have a different view of how life started is just plain silly. Pet Peeve #3: I enjoy listening to public radio and educating myself on many varied topics, but when I hear "evolutionary" used as a explanation and an answer for the way something is - from language development, to emotional responses, to dietary choices, to social mores, to our brains, to our relationships to animals, to romance, - I say enough already, it's too much. To me, it seems as if they usually are not really saying anything that is telling me something, instead just an easy and "politically correct educated" way to label something. Do we really know that - that is the way something is because of evolution or is it based on assumptions that have become ingrained and accepted so we stick with it, regardless of actual knowledge. I often think that the words "designed" or "created" could be substituted in for "evolved" and the basic point would still get across, it's a matter of perspective/view. Pet Peeve # 4: Tendency to be divisive and have a "Know it all attitude" by some Creationists and Evolutionists. I in no way want this post to be that! I probably should have put this one first and emphasized a disclaimer that this blog post is my opinion only and I am not a scientist, do not have a degree in science and realize that many know much more than I do. I respect people's freedom to think and believe and question and hold different views and I realize there is a wide spectrum of views within Creation/Intelligent Design and Evolution respectively. For example: two people might believe that the earth was created by God, but disagree on the age of the earth. So, now that my pet peeves are out of the way, I will do my best to summarize some of the cool things I remember about Creation Science. One important thing from my past studies that I came away with is the idea that with both theories of Origin - one has to make assumptions. You cannot really get around this, if you are going to accept Evolution - you have to start with the assumption that the earth was not created, that there was not an intelligent being who designed it. If you are going to accept Creation then you start with the assumption that it was not random chance and was designed. Both theories start with assumptions, but the important thing is to look at the evidence and which theory better fits with the evidence we see all around us. It is hard not to be biased with the evidence, as humans we want the evidence to fit the theory that we already hold and people can see the same things and genuinely interpret and find meaning in it differently. But, I do think it is important that when we think about Evolution and Creation Science that we always keep this in the forefront of our minds - that both theories are based on initial assumptions and beliefs that are virtually impossible to prove scientifically. It is the evidence that matters and all we have is our earth present day, historical records and our interpretations (which are based on assumptions) of geological features and fossils. A major difference between the theories is that if Evolution was the means of what we see today, it would have had to take a long time for it to do it's work. I don't presume to be a Geologist, but in general what is taught and believed is that most features such as the Grand Canyon and fossils happened millions of years ago and took a long time in the making. Creation Science on the other hand, has the belief that a world-wide flood explains a lot of the geology and features we see today and in a much shorter time. Ancient people groups all over the world have passed down legends and stories of an epic flood such as the Aborigines, Chinese, and peoples in the Middle East - and of course the Biblical story of Noah's Ark and the flood. These are intriguing to read about and to think about how the landscpape would have dramatically changed over years as catastropic events would have been happening on the globe. I really do not have the ability without going back to sources and books - to explain some of the different epic flood - geology theories describing possible explanations for canyons, coal fields, rock layers, petrified wood, the Ice Age and fossils - but they are out there and they are interesting and some of them make very good sense. I remember an expression I read from on Creation Scientist who said something like, "What would you expect to see if there was a world-wide flood, - millions of dead things all over the earth layed down in rock layers - and what do you see - millions of dead things, layed down in rock layers all over the earth". What he is talking about is fossils - fossils all over the earth, from ocean critters far from oceans & at the tops of mountains to dinosaurs and other extinct animals to animals and plants we still recognize today. Living things need to have the right conditions to fossilize and become stone. Generally this happens when they are covered quickly with mud layers that contain the right minerals to start the process, like in a flood. Most plants and animals die and rot away before they have the chance to become a fossil. One last thought about fossils - where are the transitional fossils that we should see if one accepts the evolutionary theory of simpler life forms slowly evolving into more complex ones? Simple and complex fossils are found in rock layers together and we see fully formed and complete animals. I have heard of interpretations of certain animals or animal organs being considered as transitional fossils, but it seemed a stretch. There are so many interesting things to think and read about concerning science and the Origin debate for example the DNA code (who wrote it or how could it have evolved?) or Astronomy. I know I have barely touched the topic and if you are still reading this far - I hope that something perked your interest. There is a lot of information out there in books and on the internet regarding Creation Science/Intelligent Design and Evolution. I am in awe of the vast complexity and connectiveness we see in nature and to be true to myself I will join the Psalmist King David and proclaim, "The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of His hands."  |
